Suppr超能文献

在早期、晚期和复发性卵巢癌、输卵管癌及原发性腹膜癌的评估与治疗中,比较传统腹腔镜手术与机器人辅助腹腔镜手术的围手术期结果和并发症发生率。

Comparison of perioperative outcomes and complication rates between conventional versus robotic-assisted laparoscopy in the evaluation and management of early, advanced, and recurrent stage ovarian, fallopian tube, and primary peritoneal cancer.

作者信息

Nezhat Farr Reza, Finger Tamara Natasha, Vetere Patrick, Radjabi Amir Reza, Vega Mario, Averbuch Lauren, Khalil Susan, Altinbas Sadiman Kiykac, Lax Daniel

机构信息

*St Luke's Roosevelt Hospital, Columbia University, New York; †Winthrop University Hospital, Mineola; and ‡New York Downtown Hospital, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY; §Etlik Zubeyde Hanim Women's Health Training and Research Hospital, Ankara, Turkey; and ∥Sackler School of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel.

出版信息

Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2014 Mar;24(3):600-7. doi: 10.1097/IGC.0000000000000096.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to examine perioperative outcomes, including complication rates, of conventional laparoscopy (CL) versus robotic-assisted laparoscopy (RALS) in the evaluation and management of early, advanced, and recurrent ovarian, fallopian tube, and peritoneal cancer.

METHODS

This is a retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database of surgery performed from July 2008 to December 2012. Sixty-three women had 83 surgeries performed; 22 surgeries for early-stage disease (International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage I) and 61 for advanced and/or recurrent disease.

RESULTS

Of the 22 for early stage, 10 were CL, 9 were RALS, and 3 were laparoscopy converted to laparotomy (LP). There was no significant difference between CL and RALS in estimated blood loss (EBL, P = 0.27) or length of stay (LOS, P = 0.43); however, both had significantly less EBL (P = 0.03 and 0.03, respectively) and LOS (P = 0.03 and 0.03) than LP. There was no difference in OR time among the groups (P = 0.79). One patient (33%) had an intraoperative complication in LP. One patient (10%) had a postoperative complication in CL, 2 (22%) in RALS, and 1 (33%) in LP, with no significant difference (P = 0.61).Among the 42 patients with advanced/recurrent disease, 61 surgeries were performed: 14 diagnostic procedures and 47 cytoreductive surgeries. Of the 47, there was no difference in operating room time (P = 0.10). There was no difference in EBL or LOS between CL and RALS (P = 0.82, P = 0.87); however, both were less in CL (P < 0.001 and P = 0.02) and RALS (P = 0.01 and P = 0.02) compared with LP. There were 5 (63%) intraoperative transfusions in LP and none in CL or RALS. When including all surgeries for advanced/recurrent disease, there was 1 intraoperative complication (12%) in LP. There was no difference in postoperative complications between groups (P = 0.89); 8 patients (19%) had postoperative complications in CL, 2 (18%) in RALS, and 2 (25%) in LP. Overall, there were no grade 4 or 5 complications and no perioperative or intraoperative deaths.

CONCLUSIONS

In our experience, perioperative outcomes are comparable between CL and RALS in both early and advanced/recurrent disease and not inferior to laparotomy, making CL and RALS an acceptable approach in selected patients.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在探讨在早期、晚期及复发性卵巢癌、输卵管癌和腹膜癌的评估与治疗中,传统腹腔镜手术(CL)与机器人辅助腹腔镜手术(RALS)的围手术期结局,包括并发症发生率。

方法

这是一项对2008年7月至2012年12月前瞻性维护的手术数据库进行的回顾性分析。63名女性接受了83台手术;其中22台用于早期疾病(国际妇产科联盟I期),61台用于晚期和/或复发性疾病。

结果

在22例早期手术中,10例为CL,9例为RALS,3例为腹腔镜中转开腹手术(LP)。CL与RALS在估计失血量(EBL,P = 0.27)或住院时间(LOS,P = 0.43)方面无显著差异;然而,两者的EBL(分别为P = 0.03和0.03)和LOS(分别为P = 0.03和0.03)均显著低于LP。各组间手术时间无差异(P = 0.79)。LP中有1例患者(33%)发生术中并发症。CL中有1例患者(10%)发生术后并发症,RALS中有2例(22%),LP中有1例(33%),差异无统计学意义(P = 0.61)。在42例晚期/复发性疾病患者中,共进行了61台手术:14例诊断性手术和47例减瘤手术。在47例减瘤手术中,手术室时间无差异(P = 0.10)。CL与RALS在EBL或LOS方面无差异(P = 0.82,P = 0.87);然而,与LP相比,CL(P < 0.001和P = 0.02)和RALS(P = 0.01和P = 0.02)的EBL和LOS均更低。LP中有5例(63%)术中输血,CL和RALS中均无。当纳入所有晚期/复发性疾病手术时,LP中有1例术中并发症(12%)。各组术后并发症无差异(P = 0.89);CL中有8例患者(19%)发生术后并发症,RALS中有2例(18%),LP中有2例(25%)。总体而言,无4级或5级并发症,无围手术期或术中死亡。

结论

根据我们的经验,在早期和晚期/复发性疾病中,CL与RALS的围手术期结局相当,且不劣于开腹手术,这使得CL和RALS在特定患者中是一种可接受的手术方式。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验